is malice of forethought. this is a very clear part of the charge. the charge, the part that will get them is the circumstantial evidence. because, you know, nobody wants to believe that a husband is going to kill his wife and his son. this is domestic violence. nobody has talked about it. women are more likely to be killed by a husband or member of the family than any other category or person. i want to back up. you re talking about the drugs. he s already admitted that he s is a liar. he talked about the financial crimes. he s admitted i m a liar, a thief and a drug addict. he said i m all of those things but not a killer. it s important when you talk about drugs being part and parcel of the state of mind when the murders happened. because alec murdaugh was on video and at the kennels in the moments before the murder happened. people testified yes, that is alec murdaugh s voice on that
murdaugh is standing. the jury will leave and begin deliberations. is there something that you think stuck out in that trial? you covered this way back when when robert blake was accused of murder. he was acquitted. the reason he was acquitted is because they could never tie him to the weapon. in this case, they could never tie alex murdaugh to the weapons. does that matter? does that still seem like a pivotal part of this case? i believe it is a pivotal part. while i believe at this juncture alex murdaugh is guilty, i think there s a big problem for the state. not having to murder weapon. we may find it some day, maybe not in our lifetimes. but he had ample opportunity on a nearly 2,000 acre spread to get rid of the murder weapons. what convinced me the most in my opinion is that when he first
continued. trace: he did it because he loved himself a lot more than he loved his wife and his son. a compelling argument. he did. anyone that knows anything about addicts, they re very self-centered and exhibited behavior that falls short of yourself. that said, if this trial is he a guilty thief, addict, liar, then they have proven it beyond all doubt. yes, he starts off at 2 1/2 strikes, not three. here s a man that could not tell the truth to save his life. it doesn t mean murder. you go to the physical evidence. you go to the circumstances. there s enough reasonable doubt if they wanted to find him not guilty and conversely if they wanted to discredit what he s saying and look at the evidence and see the lies for what they are, they can find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. mark, stand by.
murder of paul murdaugh, possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime involving the murder of margaret maggie murdaugh and possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime involving the murder of paul murdaugh. each indictment charges a separate and distinct offense. you must decide each indictment separately on the evidence and the law applicable to it uninfluenced by your decision as to any other indictment. the defendant may be convicted or acquitted on any or all of the offenses charged. you ll be asked to write a separate verdict of guilty or not guilty for each indictment. a defendant richard alexander
let s bring in mercedes colwin listening to this thing. great to have you, by the way. you listen to this all. you think mark makes a good point. they re setting this thing up. yes, he was a crook. yes, he was a drug addict and a liar. not necessarily a murderer. when you re in the jury room and you have someone say yeah, i m a drug addict, a liar and a courtroom, but i m not a killer, it s hard to separated those things, mercedes. absolutely right, trace. i agree with what mark said. one of the biggest challenges for the prosecution, the fact that they offered up a motive that doesn t make sense. if you fall back on the big lie that he lied to investigators on the night of the murder, that he was there at the kennels, that is enormous. that s a huge lie. if you cared for your family and may have just been murdered and you said you re a great father and husband and you come upon this horrific scene and the